Speaker summary
⁠84%2 analyzed articles/videos134 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Natasha Hill results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 70.3% saturation with 94.166 hits. Analysis detected 301.039 faulty-reasoning hits from 134 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 24.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠40% (17,151 of 28,364 speakers). This Natasha Hill is better (less manipulative) than 60.50% of the peer group.
Natasha Hill
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 134
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

40% percentile
025507510039.5% percentile
24.6% BS Score2 analyzed videos134 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 70.3%70.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 57.2%57.2%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 17.0%17.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 4.8%4.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 16.6%16.6%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 17.0%17.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 6.8%6.8%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 6.8%6.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Indoctrination: Speaker 70.3%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 57.2%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 17.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 19.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 17.0%, sitewide 0.0%Ad Hominem: Speaker 16.6%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 6.8%, sitewide 1.5%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 6.8%, sitewide 1.1%IndoctrinationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos